9.3.9. Cultural Integrity

In many small island states, a number of factors, including isolation and close
traditional ties to the land and sea, have contributed to the development of
a unique set of cultural traits on different islands or groups of islands. In
Tuvalu, for instance-as in other small Pacific atoll states-attachment to land
and sea is a critical component of local cosmology (SPREP, 1996). Any force
that poses a threat to this attachment would be culturally and socially disruptive
in these traditional societies.

Ethnic, linguistic, social, and religious differences among and between the
peoples of Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia in the South Pacific illustrate
the cultural diversity of the island states. The unique cultures that have developed
over millenia on the resource-rich and diverse high-volcanic and limestone islands
in the region, such as Vanuatu, Fiji, and Samoa, are unlikely to be seriously
threatened by climate change. On the other hand, resource-poor, low-reef islands
and atolls, which have developed equally distinctive traditional identities
over centuries-such as the Tuvaluan, Kiribati, Marshallese, and Maldivian cultures-are
more at risk. The fragility of these low islands and their sensitivity to sea-level
change and storms suggest that the future existence of such islands and their
cultural diversity could be seriously threatened (Roy and Connell, 1991).

9.4. Integrated Analysis of Potential Vulnerabilities and Impacts

Because of their strong dependence on economic sectors that are highly sensitive
to climate change effects (e.g., coastal tourism and agriculture), small island
states clearly are a vulnerable group of countries (IPCC 1996, WG III, Sections
6.5.10, 6.5.11). Briguglio (1993) developed a mean "vulnerability index" for
different categories of nations, based on three selected variables: export dependence,
insularity and remoteness, and proneness to natural disasters. Although there
may be some limitations associated with this index (e.g., the restricted criteria),
it supports the widely held view that small island states will be more vulnerable
than any other group of countries to projected climate change impacts. On a
scale from 0 (lowest vulnerability) to 1 (highest vulnerability), a score of
0.590 (the highest index) was derived for the small island group. A lower index,
0.539, was calculated for other developing countries; the index for all developing
countries as a group was 0.417. Indeed, based on Briguglio's index, 9 of the
10 most vulnerable countries are small islands. Thus, though the index has its
limitations, it draws attention to the high vulnerability of small island states
in relation to all other regional groups.

Pernetta (1988) ranks Pacific islands in terms of their vulnerability to sea-level
rise, taking other factors-such as elevation-into consideration. Based on his
classification, states such as the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and Kiribati would
suffer "profound" impacts, including disappearance in the worst-case scenario;
"severe impacts," resulting in major population displacement, would be experienced
by the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, and Tonga; "moderate to severe
impacts" would be felt by Fiji and the Solomon Islands; and "local severe to
catastrophic" effects would be experienced by Vanuatu and Western Samoa.

It must be emphasized, however, that the sensitivity of small islands to the
projected effects of climate change cannot be attributed to any single factor
(e.g., size, elevation, remoteness, or any other) or to a select group of factors.
Rather, the level of vulnerability of these islands is determined by the cumulative
and synergistic result of these and related biophysical attributes (including
the degree of natural adaptive capacity), combined with the islands' economic
and sociocultural characters (including current and future levels of anthropogenic
stress) (see, e.g., SPREP, 1996). Moreover, because many small islands already
are prone to other hazards (e.g., tropical cyclones and storm surges) that invariably
have adverse effects, climate change impacts on longer time scales could render
these countries extremely vulnerable.

The Caribbean countries are a case in point. Some face an annual threat from
hurricanes (cyclones); others, such as St. Vincent and Montserrat, are prone
to disruptive volcanic activity; and still others are affected by periodic earthquakes
and tsunamis (Maul, 1996). Most have extensive, vulnerable, low-lying coastal
plains; some (e.g., Barbados, Antigua, St. Kitts, Bahamas) are heavily dependent
on groundwater supplies; and for many, tourism is the most vital economic sector.
A higher incidence of flooding and inundation, beach and coastal land loss,
reef damage, salinization of the freshwater lens, and disruption of tourism
and infrastructure would create economic and social crises in a number of these
islands. Thus, many Caribbean countries must be classified as vulnerable to
the effects of climate change and sea-level rise-not simply because of their
size or elevation alone but because of strong linkages between these and other
physical characteristics, natural resources, and socioeconomic structures.

Moreover, for small islands with limited resources, it is absolutely essential
for integrated assessment models to include the value of nonmarketed goods and
services that also will be at risk. Commodities such as cultural and subsistence
assets (e.g., community structures), recreational values, traditional skills
and knowledge, and natural values (e.g., the capacity of mangroves to filter
nitrate and phosphate and thus reduce nutrient loading to the marine zone) are
just as important to some small islands as marketed goods and services. Such
nonmarketed goods and services often are not incorporated into integrated assessment
models. From the perspective of small island states, the integration of these
assets is an important and necessary challenge facing the modeling community.
Some recent attempts to develop an appropriate methodology for vulnerability
assessment, incorporating these factors, have been made by Yamada et al. (1995)
for southWest Pacific islands.

Clearly, it would be inappropriate to assess the sensitivity of small islands
to climate change impacts in isolation from other factors that contribute to
their overall vulnerability. Constraining factors such as size, elevation, limited
resources (natural, financial, and technological), proneness to natural hazards,
dependence on external markets, and generally high population growth rates enhance
the vulnerability of these island states (Alm et al., 1993). Only when the effects
of such factors are evaluated in combination with the threat of climate change
impacts can a meaningful vulnerability index for small island states be developed
and appropriate adaptation options pursued (see Box 9-6).

Box 9-6. A Small Island Response
to Climate Change

Climate change will impose diverse and significant impacts on small island
states. Impediments to responses to climate change in small islands include:

Lack of definitive projections of temperature, rainfall, and sea level

Ambiguous statements on ENSO and tropical storms, hurricanes, and
typhoons

Many vulnerability assessments undertaken using methodologies "poorly
harmonized with local conditions"

Limited adaptive capacity of small island states.

Possible Regional Responses to Facilitate Adaptation to
Climate Change for Small Island States

Policy Responses

A policy of regional cooperation and coordination

A policy of "owning" the issue of climate change and variability

A policy of maximizing the benefits of climate change

A policy to base plans and actions on factual understanding
of climate change

A policy of mainstreaming climate change responses in national
planning through adaptation of sustainable management practices

A policy of enhancing capacities to respond to the consequences
of anticipated change in climate